|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
[PFS] Survivability of Fullcasters at level 1? Or is it impossible to make your first PFS character a fullcaster without getting some GM or pre-gen credit first?
Point Blank Shot, Precise shot, and Weapon Focus (Ray)- Even ranged touch attacks miss. The question is, how often do they miss by exactly 1 or 2? How often do you use them? Is it worth two or three feats? Considering all the feats that will do far more for you to keep you alive and contributing, the answer is no. Big creatures have horrible touch ACs as a general rule, and even at a minus, you can usually hit. It isn’t like the old days, when a miss could hurt your allies. You got, or will get a belt, right?
Better to miss with a ray, than hit and watch it not work (Spell Penetration), or fail a fort save (Greater Fortitude), or get slaughtered because you thought you’d make it to 16th level without any armor (Arcane Armor Training). Sneak blasting is a fun feature of your character, but it’s not your raison d'être. It’s not that great.
I don't see any need for Alertness. Take Toughness, instead. Scouts need hit points worthy of their role.
Since you're starting at high level, ignore AAT. That's for surviving low level play, until you have +8 bracers.
Get a wand of True Strike and use it when you have the time. That won't be often, but it helps a lot when you can.
It's better to have Spell Penetration so that when you hit, the spell actually works.
I don't know about you, but I was pissed whan Batman slapped Robin so hard it killed him.
I mean, yeah, Robin could be a moron sometimes, but he was pretty good at his job.
He never complained about his ridiculous outfit. That made him worth keeping, right there.
I may never be able to forgive the Batman.
I take it to mean 30' unless you have sniper goggles.
However, the trickster ability overrides the range limitation, since it says "any spell that deals damage." The limitation would be the range of the spell, and you can add sneak damage if your target is flat footed to you (or you use Impromptu sneak attack).
Tricksters won't have that ability until they're 16th level or so, so it's hardly overpowered.
This is partially answered in the FAQ:
The Surprise Spells class feature allows the Arcane Trickster to add his sneak attack dice to spells that deal damage that target flat-footed foes. This damage is only applied once per spell. In the case of fireball this means it affects all targets in the area, with each getting a save to halve the damage (including the sneak attack damage). In the case of magic missile, the extra damage is only added once to one missile, chosen by the caster when the spell is cast.
—Jason Bulmahn, 05/31/11
Andrew R wrote:
R seems to have an aversion to acknowledging privilege, let alone its effects in society, given his extreme view of the less fortunate.
You can use concealment to make a stealth check. Make it, and you can snipe that round for SA damage. You have to make the check again at -20 to do it next round, but, unlike Invisibility, it doesn't go away once you've attacked. If you have some cover or something to hide behind at the end of you turn, you can try it again next round.
Blur is less useful once you have Greater Invisibility. Until then, it's good because regular Invisibility is gone once you attack. You'll eventually have a ring of Invisibility, but it's still the low-level spell. So, at lower levels, try Blur for combat, Invisibility for scouting.
Sorry it took me so long to see your post! I should probably explain that better in the guide.
I'm pretty sure Gore would have probably heeded the warnings that Bush ignored, and 9-11 would likely have been foiled.
Bush and co. were planning to invade Iraq before they even got into office, and Gore wasn't involved with PNAC. So, if Gore hadn't been able to stop 9-11, he still wouldn't have invaded Iraq, and millions of lives would not have been shattered.
He would instead have used the world's sympathy to get their help in going after the terrorists, and would have succeeded.
Gore isn't Bush, and that alone makes him the better man.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
While it's all very well and good to waggle your fingers and say "well, everyone should have a six month emergency reserve saved up," the simple fact is that most people don't, and they still have to be able to handle emergencies.
Particularly impossible if they only make $8.00 an hour.
Vod Canockers wrote:
OBL was still a CIA asset at the time.
Thanks! I didn't realize that about the SLA. Too late for me as this character, but a good point nonetheless. I don't think my DM would be cool with early entry, I didn't know that anyone allowed that really. Seems like there's an entry barrier for a reason perhaps? Or that's what he'd say anyway. :) I'm fine waiting anyway, almost there! Thank you for all the advice on tweaking this character so she can be all she can be. I'm sort of flip-flopping on taking the Arcane Armor training, seems my AC is going to be low anyway, might be worth it just to skip it and try not to get hit using tactics. :)
These are the kind of decisions you must make for your particular game.
There's no one right answer, and you're in the suck levels. You have the skills of a low-level rogue, and the spells of a low-level wizard. You get very few feats. Great Fortitude will always be good.
Skills first. Spells next.
With Arcane Armor training, go for a mithral shirt and add pluses when you can afford to. A lot of it has to do with what your party can craft, if anything.
A ring of invisibility is out of your league for a while, but if you have a ring for your bonded object, you can enchant it yourself for 10,000, instead of paying 20,000.
Here's a 20th level trickster I'm playing right now in a PbP. You'll notice he's crafted the heck out of his ring! XD
Doesn't look too bad. For your feat, I'd take Great Fortitude, as that is your weakest save. Nothing sucks like a failed saving throw! Every little bonus helps.
Spell Penetration would be good at 7th. You don't see a lot of SR around 5th, but you'll see more and more of it as you level up. It'll always be there for you.
I'm sure it does, but I think it has more to do with situational awareness. If you attach a mental requirement to it, wisdom is probably a better choice, IMO. Perception, etc.
Not that I'm recommending that, but I'd prefer it.
...few games reach level 15+.
That's definitely true, and I wish it weren't so. My personal experience with 15+ has always been quite positive. It takes a long time to get through a round, but that gets truer and truer the higher you go.
20th is as fun as any other level, and I do recall fighters getting shut down, sometimes, but when they weren't, they were murder.
Dimension Door with Mr. Melee and put him right next to BBEG. Hilarity will ensue. :D
That sounds fun to me.
Play what you want. You're going to have chances to get some simple gear, and at 1st level, it's pretty tough starting out with nothing, or with max gear and the rich parents trait. Even with awesome starting gear, you still have the same hit points. Gear helps a lot, but 8 hit points is 8 hit points. You gotta play smart.
Even if you play a wizard with no spells, it'll feel good to finally get that first scroll or spellbook, and immediately be able to use it. It's just 1st level.
The most effective tricksters are wizards, followed by sorcerers. Bard tricksters really are a waste of time. Just play a sneaky archetype bard and be done with it. Combining bard with rogue in the trickster class doesn't do much of anything for either side of that combination, except reduce your hit points, BAB, and cancel your progression in the unique talents of both classes. What good targeted blast spells does a bard get? He could take the Arcane Blast feat at 10th caster level, but it’s pathetic, even with sneak damage. His other spells are equally unimpressive.
Think about it: A 20th level character with the sneak attack of a 13th level rogue, a BAB of 12, one rogue talent, minor bardic abilities, fewer skill and hit points, and the earth-shaking spellcasting of a 17th level bard. What, if anything, is he good at?
A 20th level sor/wiz trickster laughs at him, and not because he’s funny, then turns him to dust out of pity. If you want to play an AT in some sort of intrigue campaign, the sorcerer AT gets all the class skills a bard does, and will be more effective overall. Just because a bard can be a trickster, that doesn't mean he should.
I’m not knocking bards. PF bards are great, and they shouldn’t bother with this PrC." -A Highly Regarded Expert's Guide to the Arcane Trickster
I agree with Dragonchess Player. You lose too much and gain too little with bard as your casting class.
Yes, backstory is key here, and there are tons of ways to go with it.
I like Fafhrdnoresman's idea about rage being her main problem. She could have been the daughter of a wealthy merchant, living comfortably in a safe city, and sure to eventually marry well and live a life of coddled comfort.
Her raging temper somehow makes her prospects dwindle until no one really trusts her. She then discovers that rage can work to her advantage in the right context, so she goes off to find her fortune on her own.
Most barbs dump cha. Barbie shouldn't. She's not crude or ugly, and is personable enough at first glance. Maybe dump int to reflect that she didn't need to learn a lot of skills, since everything was done by servants when she was growing up. She loafed in school, and isn't particularly learned for her station.
Can't cook, hates to clean, etc.
All her stuff will be masterwork, as soon as she can afford it. She might wear a mace for a back up weapon when her fancy greatsword isn't ideal, and that mace must look good with her ensemble.
On days off, she wants to party at the best places she can get into, and she'll buy the nicest clothes she can find. She's certain to make a splash, particularly if someone ticks her off!
Just scratching the surface. "Barbierian" has a lot of potential to be a very amusing character.
AM OTHER BARBARIAN wrote:
PFS tends to bunch parties up in tight spaces. There, rogues can contribute. On more open battlefields, they're just not good.
Vlad Koroboff wrote:
I only faintly comprehend this issue, but weren't there protests against this action in Russia, too? I read that there were, and the Russian po-po beat and jailed hundreds of them.
Of course, most regular people everywhere don't want war and imperialism.